alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                            5243
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   212900
<ALLOWANCES>                                      6279
<INVENTORY>                                     159619
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                379574
<PP&E>                                           48567
<DEPRECIATION>                                   15192
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  680099
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           206997
<BONDS>                                         175779
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      180310
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    680099
<SALES>                                        1270512
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1271428
<CGS>                                          1036701
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1230178
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  2031
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  1900
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               29466
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   7853
<INCOME-TAX>                                      4915
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2938
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2938
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                                 COMPUSA INC.

                      COMPUTATIONS OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                     (in thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                      THIRTEEN WEEKS ENDED    THIRTY-NINE WEEKS ENDED
                                      ---------------------   -----------------------
                                      MARCH 28,   MARCH 29,   MARCH 28,     MARCH 29, 
                                        1998        1997        1998          1997
                                      ---------   ---------   ---------     ---------
<S>                                   <C>         <C>         <C>           <C>
                                                                            
Common shares issued at beginning                                           
 of period.........................     92,478      91,384      91,763        90,216 
Weighted average number of common                                                    
 shares issued during the period...        421          94         645           824 
Weighted treasury shares during                                                      
 the period........................     (1,381)       (368)       (881)         (375) 
                                      --------    --------    --------      -------- 
                                                                            
Weighted common shares.............     91,518      91,110      91,527        90,665 
Incremental shares related to                                               
 assumed exercise of stock options.      3,174       3,340       3,711         3,911 
                                      --------    --------    --------      --------  
                                                                            
Weighted common and common                                                  
 equivalent shares.................     94,692      94,450      95,238        94,576
                                      ========    ========    ========      ========
                                                                            
Net income.........................    $25,438     $32,715     $82,964       $70,989
                                      ========    ========    ========      ========
                                                                            
Basic earnings per share...........    $  0.28     $  0.36     $  0.91       $  0.78 
                                      ========    ========    ========      ========
                                                                            
Diluted earnings per share.........    $  0.27     $  0.35     $  0.87       $  0.75 
                                      ========    ========    ========      ========
</TABLE>
NOTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals
**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

SIEMENS INDUSTRY SOFTWARE INC.,
Appellant

v.

SYNOPSYS, INC.,

Cross

- Appellant

______________________

2023

- 1421 , 23

- 1594

______________________
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2021

- 01215

.

______________________

O R D E R

The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that:

(1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App.

P. 42 (b). Case: 23-1421 Document: 39 Page: 1 Filed: 06/10/2024S IEMENS I NDUSTRY S OFTWARE I NC

. V

. S YNOPSYS

, I NC

. 2

(2) Each side shall bear their own costs.

FOR THE COURT

June 10, 2024

Date

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: June 10, 2024 Case: 23-1421 Document: 39 Page: 2 Filed: 06/10/2024
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-14-00666-CR

Nicholas S. Morphis, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY, 421ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 13-004, HONORABLE TODD A. BLOMERTH, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Nicholas S. Morphis filed a motion to dismiss by withdrawing his

notice of appeal. Appellant’s motion to withdraw his notice of appeal is granted. See Tex. R. App.

P. 42.2(a). The appeal is dismissed.

 

Jeff Rose, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Field

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: January 28, 2015

Do Not Publish
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 18 (Wednesday, January 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 4619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01591]

[[Page 4619]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 9017]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Rembrandt: A Decade of Brilliance (1648-1658)''

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On November 28, 2014, notice was published on page 70913 of 
the Federal Register (volume 79, number 229) of determinations made by 
the Department of State pertaining to the exhibition ``Rembrandt: A 
Decade of Brilliance (1648-1658).'' The referenced notice is corrected 
here to include additional objects as part of the exhibition. Notice is 
hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority 
vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 
2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs 
Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 
U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 
1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, 
as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I 
hereby determine that the additional objects to be included in the 
exhibition ``Rembrandt: A Decade of Brilliance (1648-1658),'' imported 
from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of 
cultural significance. The additional objects are imported pursuant to 
a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine 
that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the University 
of San Diego's University Galleries, from on or about March 21, 2015, 
until on or about May 22, 2015, and at possible additional exhibitions 
or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have 
ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the 
Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the additional exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, 
Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State 
(telephone: 202-632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of 
State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

     Dated: January 22, 2015.
Kelly Keiderling,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2015-01591 Filed 1-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
# C_2020262EN.01000601.xml

| 10.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 June 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Köln — Germany) — FX v GZ, represented for legal purposes by her mother

(Case C-41/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters relating to maintenance obligations - Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 - Article 41(1) - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 24(5) - Maintenance order declared enforceable - Application opposing enforcement - Jurisdiction of the court of the Member State of enforcement)

(2020/C 262/08)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: FX

Defendant: GZ, represented for legal purposes by her mother

Operative part of the judgment

Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations is to be interpreted as meaning that an application opposing enforcement brought by the maintenance debtor against enforcement of a decision given by a court of the Member State of origin and which established that debt, which has a close link with the procedure for enforcement, falls within its scope and is within the international jurisdiction of the courts of the Member State of enforcement.

Pursuant to Article 41(1) of Regulation No 4/2009 and to the relevant provisions of national law, it is for the referring court, being a court of the Member State of enforcement, to adjudicate on the admissibility and the validity of the evidence adduced by the maintenance debtor, seeking to support the submission that he has predominantly discharged his debt.

---

(1)  OJ C 155, 6.5.2019.

---
# C_2019399EN.01004902.xml

| 25.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/49

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2019 — WI v Commission

(Case T-379/18) (1)

(Civil service - Pensions - Survivor’s pension - Registered non-marital partnership - Refusal to grant - Article 1(2)(c)(iv) of Annex VII of the Staff Regulation - Access to civil marriage - Principle of sound administration - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Exceptional Circumstances)

(2019/C 399/59)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: WI (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFUE for the annulment of the decision of the Commission of 16 August 2017 not to grant a survivor’s pension to the applicant, of the decision of 13 September 2017 in so far as it refused to grant a survivor’s pension to the applicant and of the decision of 9 March 2018 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders WI to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders WI to pay the costs of the proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 341, 24.9.2018.

---
# C_2020320EN.01002002.xml

| 28.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 320/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 320/20

---

Order of the President of the Court of 30 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla-La Mancha — Spain) — GF v Subdelegación del Gobierno en Toledo

(Case C-525/19) (1)

(2020/C 320/39)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.

---
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 40442 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. JOSE PRUDENCIO CANALES

- BONILLA , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:14

- CR

- 721

- 1

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry, Jose Prudencio Canales

- Bonilla was sentenced to 41 months of imprisonment, which sentence included a 16

- level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 (b)(1)(A)(ii) due to Canales

- Bonilla’s prior con viction for the California offense of rape of a spouse under California Penal Code § 262

. Canales

- Bonilla argues that the district court erred by convicting, sentencing, and entering judgment against

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fif th Circuit 

### FILED November 23, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-40442 Document: 00513771586 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/23/2016No. 15

- 40442

2 him “based on its determination that his 1997 Californi a conviction for rape of a spouse qualified as a conviction for a ‘crime of violence’ under 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) and thus one for an ‘aggravated felony’ under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F).” Relying primarily on Johnson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), h e argues that the definition of a c rime of violence in § 16(b), as incorporated by reference into the definition of an aggravated felony in § 1101(a)(43)(F), is unconstituti onally vague on its face. He further contends that this court cannot apply § 16(b ) in this case without violating due process. The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance, urging that Canales

- Bonilla ’s argument s are foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Gonzalez

- Longoria , 831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc) , petition for cert. filed (Sept. 29, 2016) (No. 16

- 6259) . The Government is correct that Gonzalez

- Longoria forecloses Canales

- Bonilla’s facial vagueness challenge to § 16(b) , and his challenge to our application of § 16(b) on due process g rounds

. 1 See id. Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternate motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED.

1 The recent grant of certiorari by the United States Supreme Court on the issue whether § 16(b) is unconstitutional in light of Johnson in Lynch v. Dimaya , ___ S. Ct. ___, 2016 WL 3232911 ( Sept. 29, 2016 ), does not alter the analysis. This court is bound by its own precedent unless and until that precedent is altered by a decision of the Supreme Court. See Wicker v. McCotter , 798 F.2d 155, 157

- 58 (5th Cir. 1986)

. Case: 15-40442 Document: 00513771586 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/23/2016
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-3478

_____________________________

COLBY ALLEN SMITH,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus — Original Jurisdiction.

May 18, 2018

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004). 

WOLF, ROBERTS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Rocco Joseph Carbone, III, of Rocco Joseph Carbone, III, PLLC, St. 

Augustine, for Petitioner.
2

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Steven Edward Woods, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1071 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1071

    To amend the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 to expand the amount 
    available for victims of child abuse, sexual assault, domestic 
          violence, and other crimes, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 23, 2015

 Mr. Toomey (for himself, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Gardner, Mr. Crapo, and Mr. 
    Corker) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 to expand the amount 
    available for victims of child abuse, sexual assault, domestic 
          violence, and other crimes, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fairness for Victims of Crime Act of 
2015''.

SEC. 2. CRIME VICTIMS FUND.

    Section 1402 of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601) 
is amended by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
    ``(c)(1) Sums deposited in the Fund shall remain in the Fund and be 
available for expenditure under this chapter for grants under this 
chapter without fiscal year limitation, in accordance with paragraph 
(2). Notwithstanding subsection (d)(5), all sums deposited in the Fund 
in any fiscal year that are not made available for obligation by 
Congress in the subsequent fiscal year shall remain in the Fund for 
obligation in future fiscal years, without fiscal year limitation.
    ``(2) On and after October 1, 2015, the amount available for 
expenditure from the Fund for a fiscal year shall be equal to the 
entire amount in the Fund.
    ``(3) On and after October 1, 2015, the difference between the 
amount Congress makes available for expenditure from the Fund for a 
fiscal year and the average of the annual sums deposited in the Fund 
during--
            ``(A) the fiscal year that is 4 years prior to the current 
        fiscal year;
            ``(B) the fiscal year that is 3 years prior to the current 
        fiscal year; and
            ``(C) the fiscal year that is 2 years prior to the current 
        fiscal year,
shall not count for purposes of scorekeeping under rule 3 of the Budget 
Scorekeeping Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory statement of 
the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report 105-217.''.
                                 <all>
```
Safeguarding American Agriculture

Federal Relay Service

APHIS is an agency of USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory Programs (Voice/TTY/ASCII/Spanish)

 An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer 1-800-877-8339

 

 

February 2, 2011

CENTER FOR VETERINARY BIOLOGICS NOTICE NO. 11-02

TO: Biologics Licensees, Permittees, and Applicants 

Directors, Center for Veterinary Biologics

Veterinary Services Management Team

FROM: Richard E. Hill, Jr. /s/ Richard E. Hill, Jr.

Director

Center for Veterinary Biologics

SUBJECT: Generation and Implementation of Draft Guidance

I. PURPOSE

The purpose of this Notice is to clarify how Draft Guidance documents are generated and 

implemented by the Center for Veterinary Biologics (CVB).

II. BACKGROUND

Draft Guidance refers to guidance documents (Title 9, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 

101.2) related to matters that fall under the Virus-Serum-Toxin-Act that are in the form 

of draft Memoranda or draft Notices that have not been finalized.

III. POLICY

Draft Guidance is shared with the public in order to provide transparency regarding 

current thinking and to elicit comments to improve the document. Draft Guidance is not 

considered mandatory to industry and will not be implemented as such by the CVB. 

However, Draft Guidance should be regarded as conveying the direction in which the 

CVB is planning to move, and provide guidance about this. 

To clarify the intent of Draft Guidance, draft documents will include information 

regarding the scope and implementation of the guidance document, and what products 

and/or processes will be affected.

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Animal and Plant

Health Inspection

Service

Veterinary Services

Center for Veterinary 

Biologics

1920 Dayton Avenue

PO Box 844

Ames, IA 50010

(515) 337-6100